Rohit Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67967 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-372 Year-2019 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== 1.

ROHIT RANJAN Son of Vinod Kumar Singh @ Vithi Singh Resident of Village-Baghi, Police Station-Mufassil, District-Samastipur. 2.

Ravi Ranjan Son of Vinod Kumar Singh @ Vithi Singh Resident of VillageBaghi, Police Station-Mufassil, District-Samastipur. 3.

Rahul Ranjan Son of Vinod Kumar Singh @ Vithi Singh Resident of Village-Baghi, Police Station-Mufassil, District-Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amarendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 24-10-2019 Petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Samastipur (M) P.S. Case No. 372 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

As per F.I.R police has received secret information that petitioners and others co-accused have kept liquor in the house of one Vinod Kumar Singh alias Vidhi Singh and on that information police raided the house of Vinod Kumar Singh and total 719.145 liters of liquor was recovered from the house of the Vinod Kumar Singh. Houses of the petitioners were also raided but they were found absconding.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67967 of 2019(2) dt.24-10-2019 2/2 Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is no recovery from the house of the petitioners or on their instances. They have been made accused only on general allegation that secret information with regard to selling of wine have been received against them by the police. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer of bail on the ground that there is specific information of selling liquor against the petitioners and others and on that information recovery has been made.

Having heard both sides, in view of the allegation as discussed above, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, however, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below and make prayer for regular bail which shall be considered on the basis of material available in the case diary without being prejudiced by dismissal of this order.

With the aforesaid, this application is dismissed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) T.Kr./- U T